4 ms·
ID is also required to receive welfare or exercise the 2nd amendment or 1st amendment right to peaceful assembly (many municipalities require a permit for that,
by h4b4n3r0 8y ago
ID is also required to receive welfare or exercise the 2nd amendment or 1st amendment right to peaceful assembly (many municipalities require a permit for that, which will not be issued to a person without an ID).
It's interesting that requiring an ID to vote is "disenfranchisement" yet thousands of other things where ID is required (including the exercise of some constitutional rights) are not "disenfranchisement".
- spacehome 8y agoIt's controversial because people without ID overwhelmingly vote for one party. If having an ID were uncorrelated with party affiliation, we wouldn't be having this stupid conversation.
- ravenstine 8y agoThere's nothing that you said that isn't factual. What's funny is any argument against voter ID should be blown out of the water by just making IDs totally free (yes, I know, paid by taxpayers). But I've had this discussion with people before, including people who actually believe that it's racist to have any form of ID to be required anywhere. Yes, these people do exist. The conversation always goes down the road of "well what about the mountain people who live 200 miles from the DMV, don't work, don't have an address, don't have a car, and can't take a bus?" It's the most immature form of "debate" to hunt and peck for extreme edge cases and pretend that they are silver bullets. Aha! It doesn't work for the minority who won't hop on a bike and become a part of civilization, therefore those who are pro voter ID hate the poor. Yeeeup. Personally, I don't really care about this issue as I think voting is a waste of time and I don't do it anymore. But it's hilarious just how far extremists will take the argument.